Birth certificate bill bad all around Reggie Rivers -- Denver Post Columnist March 28, 2002

At first blush, the arguments against allowing gay couples to put both of their names on a birth certificate seem reasonable and cogent. After all, a birth certificate is a factual record and, therefore, the names of the true biological parents should be recorded.

Rep. Pam Rhodes, R-Thornton, who sponsored House Bill 1356, said, "The creation of a child takes one man and one woman, so the birth certificate should reflect those facts."

Rep. Bill Cadman, R-Colorado Springs, said, "I co-sponsored this legislation because I believe vital statistics should be accurate."

Those are logical statements. However, they're just soundbites and don't reflect what the legislature is really doing. Reps. Rhodes, Cadman and Senate sponsor Marilyn Musgrave are not truly interested in "accurate" birth records, which becomes clear when you read HB 1356 and then check the sections of the Colorado Revised Statutes that the new law would amend.

When a child is adopted in Colorado, the state issues a new birth certificate with the names of the new parents added. Are Rhodes, Cadman and Musgrave proposing that this process be ended? Of course not. There are a lot of good reasons to change the "facts" on a birth certificate, and most of them have to do with privacy and confidentiality.

If you adopt a child, it should be up to you to decide whether you want to tell people that she is adopted. If the state required simple "accuracy" on birth certificates, then you, as the adoptive parent, would have a document with the names of her biological parents on it. When you sign her up for gymnastics class at age 5 and are required to produce a birth certificate as proof of age, you're required to reveal to the organizers that your child is adopted.

Or perhaps you haven't told your daughter that she was adopted, and you're waiting until she's older. But she learns the truth when she sees her birth certificate one day and says, "Who's name is that?"

Birth certificates are changed so that adopted children and their new parents have privacy and aren't required to reveal the adoption unless they choose to do so. There's also the need to keep biological parents from tracking down their children.

If the mother who gave up her child two years ago changes her mind, she shouldn't be permitted to track down and harass the adoptive family. Or the reverse may happen. The child who was given up for adoption may want to track down his birth mother, but what if she doesn't want to be contacted?

For these reasons, and many others, adoption records are sealed and birth certificates are changed, and while it's not "accurate" to change the "vital statistics" on a birth certificate, there are compelling reasons for doing so.

Given that there are thousands of "altered" birth certificates for adopted children in Colorado and only 45 reflecting parents of the same sex, it's curious that Rhodes, Cadman and Musgrave assert the need for "facts" and "accuracy" by stamping out the 45, while not saying a word about the thousands.

Birth certificates are changed because it's in the best interest of everyone involved in the adoption to change them. HB 1356 is evidence of our collective bias against gay people getting in the way of common sense and fairness. We're so eager to restrict the rights of gay people that we ignore the innocent people who we hurt along the way.

HB 1356 is bad for children being raised by gay couples, it's bad for gay couples who are trying to assert their parental rights, and it's bad for Colorado. Hopefully, common sense will prevail.